Does big business get what is going on here?

Jonathan Shapiro
4 July 2016
AFR
At a time when almost anything is possible in world politics, the reaction from big business to the election non-result was laboriously predictable.
This was the ‘worst result possible for Australia’ because ‘business hates uncertainty’. Politicians must ‘make life easier not harder’ for business’ while a ‘roadmap’ was urgently needed.
The business community does have good reasons to be miffed by what has unfolded, and for saying so.
Political gridlock and uncertainty is, and has been, bad for business. Although there must be other forces at play which have stymied investment, in particular sub-trend global growth.
The campaign too has been disappointing and disturbing. Malcolm Turnbull was a rare candidate that was initially popular with business and beyond.
But he ran an ineffectual campaign that was remarkable only in how it managed to vaporise so much goodwill. Meanwhile was the opposition’s campaign, which was meant to be grounded in substantive policy, only took off when it resorted to blatant scare-campaigning.
The frustration expressed by business lobby groups seemed to miss the bigger picture at play in Australia and around the world.
Whether it’s the shock Brexit vote, the bewildering rise of Donald Trump in the US, or the 25 per cent of votes that Australia’s major parties failed to attract, voters are turning their back on the status quo.
Abuse of public trust
They are rejecting the calls of business leaders, and the voices of authority because they believe them to be grossly self serving. They are rejecting the message of big business simply because it’s delivered by big business.
“One thing I have learned being a hedge fund manager is that no one trusts banks and business people any more,” said a London-based hedge fund manager to clients in the wake of Britain’s leave vote.
“The public trust has been so abused so the public is cynical that if this group is arguing to stay, and they are so self-interested, that their motivation is it must be good for them and by definition bad for me.”
That the interests of business and the electorate – the will for a stable and prosperous nation – are one and the same is simply not resonating with voters, even if it is true.
Voters around the world either can no longer see or simply don’t believe that business leaders and politicians are acting in their interests. And politicians and business leaders are doing a poor job of demonstrating that what is good for business, is good for the economy, the nation and its citizens.
As a result, there is agitation for change. Voters are willing to protest, as a means for provoking some sort of response, even though such actions not may be in their immediate interest.
The trend is showing no sign of breaking, and it is increasingly universal.
What that means for the business community is that if it is to have any direct influence on voters it has to completely rethink how it communicates to the public.
Finding a message
And if it can’t find a message that works, it might have to completely rethink its strategy. Businesses will need to be more sustainable and adaptable to a world of rapidly changing politics, if they are to get their way.
If there’s one industry that will be forced to blaze a trail into this new world where voters and consumers are exercising their power, it’s the banking sector.
The opposition very effectively turned on the banks at the start of the campaign, seizing on a string of cultural failures to call for a royal commission that was pure populism.
Yet the banks could not hide from their failings. While there’s still some heel-dragging and perhaps behind the scenes discussions, at least some in the sector have grown to realise that the best response is simply to implement a better culture and to actually be more customer and community focused.
That may give them the best chance of avoiding upheaval of their cosy industry structure. Social media and nimble customer focused competitors will force this change more than anything.
The banks may come to realise that corporate advocacy will have to adapt to remain effective at a time of growing political and commercial discontent.
The election non-result is another reminder. This is not a time for business to make an urgent call to politicians and voters for stability.
It is a time for pro-business voters to make an urgent call to business: change or be chan